If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Sex Education Could Mean Charges for Teachers

MADISON, Wis. — A Wisconsin prosecutor is warning sex education teachers they could face charges if they follow a new state law that allows them to instruct students about proper contraceptive use.

A letter sent to five school districts by Juneau County District Attorney Scott Southworth said the instruction could amount to contributing to the delinquency of a minor if teachers know students are sexually active. He said the districts should drop sex education until the law is repealed.

Southworth also argued that teaching contraceptive use encourages sexual behavior among children, which equates to sexual assault because minors can't legally have sex in Wisconsin.

"Depending on the specific facts of a case ... this encouragement and advocacy could lead to criminal charges," Southworth, a Republican, wrote to districts in his county.

The law's chief author, state Rep. Tamara Grigsby, D-Milwaukee, dismissed the March 24 letter as a scare tactic.

"It's beyond ridiculous," Grigsby said Tuesday. "It's irresponsible to portray this act in the way he is."

Southworth said in a Tuesday e-mail to The Associated Press that he "merely provided a legal opinion to my school districts about the impact of the new mandate."

"It was the Legislature that acted irresponsibly," he wrote.

Wisconsin school districts aren't required to teach sex education. But the new law, which took effect March 11, lays out requirements for those that do, including teaching the benefits of abstinence, criminal penalties for having underage sex and the benefits and proper use of contraceptives.

Supporters, including groups representing nurses, health departments and the state teacher's union, maintain the law will help reduce teen pregnancies. Conservative opponents counter schools should focus on abstinence.

Southworth's letter said law would convert sex education classes "into a radical program that sexualizes our children as early as kindergarten. This, in turn, will lead to more child sexual assaults."

Southworth complained that language prohibiting biased instruction makes it impossible to teach that sexual promiscuity is wrong. He also said a clause allowing volunteer health care providers to teach sex education could open the door to Planned Parenthood employees marketing sexually oriented products to students.

Planned Parenthood doesn't go into schools unless a school asks, said Chris Taylor, public policy director for Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin. Taylor said the law is designed to prevent sexually transmitted diseases and teen pregnancies.

"The real issue here is you have a district attorney who says teachers will be prosecuted," she said.

Southworth's letter is "a friendly warning," said Matt Sande, legislative director of Pro-Life Wisconsin, which registered to lobby against the law.

"He's simply doing his duty as district attorney," Sande said.

New Lisbon Superintendent Tom Andres said his district, which was among those that received Southworth's letter, is seeking legal advice about the law. While the school board will make the ultimate decision, Andres said he believes his schools should teach according to the law if parents approve.

"We're in a moral dilemma," Andres said. "We know our kids need correct, right information. We have to know what that is and teach it in such a manner that doesn't promote sexual assault or bullying."

"Watch what people are cynical about, and one can often discover what they lack.” -- Gen. George S. Patton

I think the idea of having sex education without talking about the benefits and use of contraception makes little to no sense.

If the thought is that these kids shouldn't be having sex and as such teaching them about contraception is either A. unnecessary or B. giving them a green light to do it; I would then challenge the administration and establishment to think about it like this: C. Learning about mature, intelligent, responsible sexual habits and practices is absolutely integral to preparing these kids for their adult life...something that is very close at hand by the time they get to high school.

I agree Broken, it's naive and stupid to think that teaching about this is encouraging them to have sex. We've been thru this discussion before with the HPV vaccine. Education is the ONLY way to protect your kids. How ever much you may want to think it, some kids will experiment with sex whether they have this education or not.

When I was in high school, we had to take health as sophomores. It was a semester long class, not a full year.

As part of the class, there was a couple weeks devoted to "sex ed." It was way lame...very very light on practical information and there was absolutely nothing talked about that we couldn't have read in a encyclopedia britanica.

There was one moment though where a girl asked about condoms. She wanted to know how they were used, how to put one on, if they worked etc. The teacher shut that down immediately and told her if she wanted to know those things she would need to talk to a parent or someone else but that they weren't going to discuss it in class.

This is retarded.

I know a lot of you are thinking "Damn right! No teacher is going to tell my little girl how to use a condom! That's MY JOB!"

Well...then fucking do it already.

This girl obviously didn't feel like she could go to her parents about it. Whether she was embarassed, ashamed, scared, whatever...she felt comfortable asking her teacher.

Again, many of you are probably thinking "well, if she's too embarassed to ask about using a condom, she's too immature to have use it to begin with."

Well, realize that not all homes are as wonderful as your's and not all parents cultivate the kind of openness and comfort that you may. Perhaps your kids are absolutely 100% comfortable talking to you about all sorts of things, including putting on condoms, taking money shots, dirty sanchezes and whatever else.

Bottom line is she WAS asking someone she trusted and felt comfortable talking to...someone who is supposedly a leader and capable and trained.

Better she ask a teacher than find out on the fly in the backseat of a car and end up not using it all.

Granted, too many of our teachers are incapable of teaching grammar and geography so asking them to teach kids about sex may be asking too much but giving the teacher the benefit of the doubt, they should be able to do it without the law coming down on them for encouraging under-age sex.

Absolutely agree Broken. in this day and age IMO one can't go without the other. Last year I remember a report where an Alberta group were trying to get a handle on just how young kids were having some form of sexual contact, (ie. oral, digits, or penile penetration) or curiosity in sex. The concept was that numerous factors could have an influence on behaviours. two big factors being hormone content in the food supply, and another being exposed to sexualized content in mainstream media.....Ads, music, music videos, etc... Shockingly enough the average age was 12 in boys and 13 in girls. Aparently this age group was younger than a previous study of identical methods ten years previous where the ages showed on average 16 in boys, and 18 in girls. Given the current trend, I can't see how they could not include at the very least barrier methods of birth control, if not for unwanted pregnancy, then at the very least the ever increasing number of comunical diseases like herpes. There are two common forms....simplex A, and B. Simplex A, usually causes cold sores, and B, genital sores. Up until fairly recently the two were unrelated, and transmission was in kind but..... Over the past 2 decades, there has been a mutation in the virus where transmissions to genital areas from cold sores of the mouth are becoming common, and the virus is also becoming more resistant and the outbreak periods are extending, and having more active cycles. Not only very embarrasing, but imaginably uncomfortable and limiting for the remainder of ones life.

For this reason alone, I think this threat of charges is rediculous and irresponsible.

She looks so $#@!'n good ,so sexy and so frail....Somethin's got the bite on me, I'm goin' straight to Hell.

Absolutely agree Broken. in this day and age IMO one can't go without the other. Last year I remember a report where an Alberta group were trying to get a handle on just how young kids were having some form of sexual contact, (ie. oral, digits, or penile penetration) or curiosity in sex. The concept was that numerous factors could have an influence on behaviours. two big factors being hormone content in the food supply, and another being exposed to sexualized content in mainstream media.....Ads, music, music videos, etc... Shockingly enough the average age was 12 in boys and 13 in girls. Aparently this age group was younger than a previous study of identical methods ten years previous where the ages showed on average 16 in boys, and 18 in girls. Given the current trend, I can't see how they could not include at the very least barrier methods of birth control, if not for unwanted pregnancy, then at the very least the ever increasing number of comunical diseases like herpes. There are two common forms....simplex A, and B. Simplex A, usually causes cold sores, and B, genital sores. Up until fairly recently the two were unrelated, and transmission was in kind but..... Over the past 2 decades, there has been a mutation in the virus where transmissions to genital areas from cold sores of the mouth are becoming common, and the virus is also becoming more resistant and the outbreak periods are extending, and having more active cycles. Not only very embarrasing, but imaginably uncomfortable and limiting for the remainder of ones life.

For this reason alone, I think this threat of charges is rediculous and irresponsible.

There was something in US News a couple years back that described a study of STDs on the rise among younger teens but that it wasn't the usual VD and such. Evidently there was a spike in goneria of the throat in young girls and increase in anal warts!!

The reason for this, the study felt, was a lack of emphasis on STDs and a lack of emphasis on how they can be transmitted even without vaginal intercourse.

So much time is spent on telling kids to abstain from sex but without really emphasising anything other than AIDS and unwanted pregnancies and morality and maturity.

What about talking about blow jobs, hand jobs, anal sex and all the other stuff that people do all the while thinking they are maintaining their virginity and abstaining from "sex?"

Seems to me that if you want to get kids to really abstain from sexual content, show them some pictures of a wart-infested throat and asshole and explain to them that the best way to avoid such things is to avoid sexual contact. Then talk about promiscuity and impulse sex. Talk about how condoms don't necessarily protect against things like HPV and how girls can be just as filthy and disease ridden as the guys. Talk about how putting your mouth on other people's genitals can lead to some seriously disgusting conditions. Talk about warts and yeast infections and the funk-ass smell and bring in a doctor to explain the procedure of burning genital and anal warts off their body.

Look, I don't necessarily want to be the one to sit down a bunch of 13 year olds and have such a base and plain conversation concerning such an unsavoury topic. I certainly don't necessarily like the idea of wiping away the mystique and romance of sex and turning it into some disgusting act that results in disease. I don't think any of us really want to have to do it but if people really got real about teaching sexual health, I think we'd see less STDs and unwanted pregnancies. Perhaps we'd see a more responsible generation of young adults that yeah maybe is having lots of sex but is maintaing monogamy and approaching the subject with their eyes wide open instead of just their legs being open and their pants being down.

There was something in US News a couple years back that described a study of STDs on the rise among younger teens but that it wasn't the usual VD and such. Evidently there was a spike in goneria of the throat in young girls and increase in anal warts!!

The reason for this, the study felt, was a lack of emphasis on STDs and a lack of emphasis on how they can be transmitted even without vaginal intercourse.

So much time is spent on telling kids to abstain from sex but without really emphasising anything other than AIDS and unwanted pregnancies and morality and maturity.

What about talking about blow jobs, hand jobs, anal sex and all the other stuff that people do all the while thinking they are maintaining their virginity and abstaining from "sex?"

Seems to me that if you want to get kids to really abstain from sexual content, show them some pictures of a wart-infested throat and asshole and explain to them that the best way to avoid such things is to avoid sexual contact. Then talk about promiscuity and impulse sex. Talk about how condoms don't necessarily protect against things like HPV and how girls can be just as filthy and disease ridden as the guys. Talk about how putting your mouth on other people's genitals can lead to some seriously disgusting conditions. Talk about warts and yeast infections and the funk-ass smell and bring in a doctor to explain the procedure of burning genital and anal warts off their body.

Look, I don't necessarily want to be the one to sit down a bunch of 13 year olds and have such a base and plain conversation concerning such an unsavoury topic. I certainly don't necessarily like the idea of wiping away the mystique and romance of sex and turning it into some disgusting act that results in disease but if people really got real about teaching sexual health, I think we'd see less STDs and unwanted pregnancies. Perhaps we'd see a more responsible generation of young adults that yeah maybe is having lots of sex but is maintaing monogamy and approaching the subject with their eyes wide open instead of just their legs being open and their pants being down.

Exactly! I'm layin' it on the line here by doing so here, but when I was young, dumb and full of...well you know how it goes....I was involved with a secretary at a work place. She was in her early thirtees, gorgeous, and was in the midst of a divorce. Well, we hit it off, and we dated...among other things. one night nature took the upper hand, and I took a chance going unprotected. Well, that's all it took. Two weeks later I started to get a real uncomfortable sensation in my lower abdomen, and it eventually got very painful. I had to put my embarrasment aside and go to a clinic. Even worse for me the doctor was a woman! it turned out I had picked up an STD. From one lousy encounter an STD! Me! Well, it was treatable, and non recurring, so after getting some antibiotics, I called her up and told her what had happened and that I'd appreciate it if she got checked out. I explained that this type of urinary tract infection usually only shows symptoms in males because of physiological reasons as explained to me. She was right offended and said she had no symptoms. Well, I guess the curiosity and worry got the better of her and she did get tested, and yes....she did have it. She thought it was from me, but I assured her of my history. She then went to her ex, and as it turned out he was the one that infected her.....as well as two other women. Well at any rate, it was curable, and aside from the embarrasment and the disalution of the relationship, no harm done, thank God....but I never played without a raincoat again. Tough lesson.

Last edited by SLEEPER5150; 04.07.10 at 11:33 AM.

She looks so $#@!'n good ,so sexy and so frail....Somethin's got the bite on me, I'm goin' straight to Hell.

I learned how to properly use condoms by teaching a class of 12 year old boys how to properly put one on in a demonstration with a banana at the age of 16 in Paraguay. We had little brochures in the shape of a cartoon penis thug wearing a condom on his head like a beanie hat. His name was Pepe the Pene. How effed up is that? A third world country was being more progressive in their sex education than America in hopes to combat the major outbreak of teenage pregnancy and SIDA (AIDS) outbreaks in young teenagers.

As a society we have to figure out a way in which the intelligent people are interested in running for public office.

Because as of now, it obviously only attracts idiots.

Kids are going to figure out how sex works all on their own, if it was that damn difficult we wouldn't be a species anymore.

However, we could help them realize what can go wrong, how that can alter their lives, and how to prevent the unwanted pregnancies and STD's that comes with being sexually active.

If you want to abstain, great, more power to you (golf clap), but anyone who thinks that a person is better off by not gaining some knowledge is a complete and absolute moron.

Right man. sex is as natural as breathing. It's probably one of the few remaining truly instinctual drives we have left as a species, but with all the risks present nowadays, precautionary education just makes sense. An unwanted or unaffordable pregnancy can be very difficult, but some of the infections out there are far more of a worry. Nothing more final than a dirt nap!

She looks so $#@!'n good ,so sexy and so frail....Somethin's got the bite on me, I'm goin' straight to Hell.

I have no problem if parents don't want their kids learning about this type of stuff in school.

I also have no problem if parents want to send their kids to a school where this stuff is taught.

Some parents only want to teach abstinence. I think that this is misguided, but it is their right to do so.

This could go in a thread a started a while back about unintended consequences of law. People think it's okay or no big deal when it's a guy who owns a cigar shop/lounge who decides to give free coffee to his customers, only to be told by the city that he needs a permit to serve food--which would also mean that he can't allow smoking in his shop. Such idiocy in law-making causes most people to go "eh, no big deal, it's for the greater good". But it's not. It takes away choice and self-determination, and eventually you have situations like this.

But this issue goes beyond sex education.

First of all, people need to pay more attention to local elections, including school board elections. THESE are the elections that decide these types of issues, yet people vote for some dude for school board because they see his name on a sign most often. We pay attention for 98% of our voting for President, yet local, state, and congressional elections affect us much, much more.

Further, this is also an issue because when it comes to public schools, parents have no choice. You attend school by where you live. This is just unbelievably backwards. If I had to shop for groceries based on where I live, I'd have to go to a dangerous grocery store--where people have been shot and kidnapped--that has less choice, selections I don't like, higher prices, and longer lines. However, I prefer to go to the grocery store that's further up the street, which is much safer, cleaner, has more choice, better selection, better prices, and a self-checkout which is much quicker than waiting in line.

Yet, if grocery shopping were like school, I could only send my kid to the former unless I spent between $3000-$5000 per year just for the privilege to shop there.

Give parents choice on where to send their kids to school. Pay attention to who is locally elected. Pay attention to the unintended consequences of laws.

Our little dedication to CRPS awareness. If you don't know what this horrible disease is, please click this link to learn more. My (Brett) wife suffers from this extremely painful and debilitating nerve disorder that doctors are just now learning more about and realizing the severity. Please consider donating to help doctors find a cure for what many call the "suicide disease." Thank you!

Like Us On Facebook!

Newest Posts

Somewhere, Brettify is finally watching a video and strutting around knowing he's better than someone else on Youtube.

Okay, so here's a question. If Asgard wasn't destroyed until last year's Thor film, and it was Asgard that was protecting where the gauntlet was made, which is how Thanos gets it, then how is it that...